3659 réponses à ce sujet

[billy the squid]

@Dragoonlordz

My only issue with CDPR's move was the unworkability of the action that was taken, to send out notices of impending court action may not have been the best idea. It is tricky unless you are absolutely sure that the person did pirate the game, which with my albeit limited knowledge of tech, is hard to prove. Legal maxim "he who asserts must prove"

It's unfortunate as CDPR had the guts to remove the DRM which was causing a drop in frame rate, they give a mass of new DLC for free, all the retailer exclusive content was released, patched it and are releasing a mass of new content. And still people b*tch and moan when CDPR threatens legal action. If CDPR was able to be absolutely sure, or as this was a civil case within reasonable doubt 50/50, then frankly I would support them, I still do actually. More than that those that did pirate TW2, with no intent to buy it, should be stabbed in the eyes and have their fingers broken as some form of karmic justice.

Modifié par billy the squid, 27 janvier 2012 - 10:48 .

[MingWolf]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

If the customers were actually putting more effort into combatting it then the publishers wouldn't have to do so much.

Why should the customers put effort into combatting it?  The customers paid.  It's not their problem.

However most customers simply don't care and instead of trying to stop the one's stealing copies they spend all their time fighting the developers and publishers who are trying. In fact the worst people the ones on CDPR forums one of them which specifically said he wished the company would bend over and take the hit of being stolen from, do nothing in response; and that is a disgusting way to think imho.

See above with regards to combatting it.  Customers are fighting the means to which developers and publishers who are trying, and trying the wrong way.  This is affecting the customer, not the pirates.

CDPR gave everyone what they wanted in DRM free and amazing content as well as support (which is what some people here are also demanding via a different selection of words and phrase but same principle). The end result? They got screwed again by people stealing copies of their work in a (not small) amount. Of those same people not a single one has come up with better solution that will work. When CDPR said right at start was going to target those who steal copies of their hard work after supplying people with DRM free/amazing content, people cried and moaned again when they started doing so.

Everyone gets screwed by pirates to a varying degree.  And to my knowledge, they weren't re-implementing DRM.  They were targeting the pirates via legal action, and the only concern there was people were afraid legitimate users would be targeted.

Imho it is better to do something than nothing, if do nothing then that problem will increase ten fold because there is nothing to stop them (no DRM and no punishment). A deterrent is better than giving free reign to steal from. We lock our doors, we install car alarms, we build walls around houses. This doesn't stop people breaking in, it doesn't stop people stealing the car or radio, it doesn't stop people walking in through gate or climbing over the wall.

It's better to do something meaningful than nothing, maybe.  It depends on what your doing. 

It's doing what can to put them off even if won't erradicate the risk completley it is better to do something than nothign at all. DRM is not much different, they are trying to stop it even if has limited success until someone comes up with full proof 100% successful way then they will continue to try to find better ways to stop them. They sure as hell imho shouldn't leave the door open, rip out their own car alarm or knock down their walls because I prommise it will only increase the risk and not lower it.

They are trying to stop it, I admire that.  Limited success?  Heh, nah.  If a pirate copy of any DRM'ed game exists out there that provides the same functionality as the original, there is no success.  No limited success.  It has not deterred anything.  In this realm of software theft, it is all-or-nothing.  So far, I haven't seen the all but plenty of nothing.  

The full proof 100% is to this date, a dream.  Not to say it's impossible, but they haven't hit that milestone yet, and it's the customers who are suffering for it.  Not the pirates.  If you don't have that 100% system out there, don't do it.  I'm a pilot.  I'm not going to fly in an airplane that is only 90% free of problems.  My life hinges upon that.

For stuff like this, you can't blame the customer either.  Piracy is like a constant, it will always be there.  There is NO ONE on this planet who are perfectly honest.  Even the best would have lied about something sometime in their life.  But the customers aeren't in charge of the product either.  They are only in charge of the money they spend.  Developers have to work with that and they won't succeed if they keep passing the problem down to the customers to bear. 

Modifié par MingWolf, 27 janvier 2012 - 10:53 .

[Eurypterid]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

It's not a single player game. It's a single + multiplayer game. Just because the single player campaign is longer then say MW3 or on par with Halo doesn't change this.

Multiplayer requires access to the servers. Single player doesn't. Therefore, if a player is choosing to play single player, no access to the servers should be needed.

Requiring a client to play a game even in single player mode means I place much less value on that game. I said I wasn't going to argue with you, and I've been remiss in that I'm doing just that. Apologies, but I've said all I'm going to on the subject.

[Icinix]

MingWolf wrote...
They are trying to stop it, I admire that.  Limited success?  Heh, nah.  If a pirate copy of any DRM'ed game exists out there that provides the same functionality as the original, there is no success.  No limited success.  It has not deterred anything.  In this realm of software theft, it is all-or-nothing.  So far, I haven't seen the all but plenty of nothing.  

*I do not endorse piracy, I hate it, and I will probably get banned for saying this*

Piracy can obviously be expected to be cheaper than doing the right thing, but what piracy should never be is EASIER than doing the right thing.

When you have created a situation where a pirated version of a game is EASIER to play and provides less overheads on the gamer and less restrictions on when, how, where they play the game, you have a big problem.

[Mitchumas]

(Mods forgive me for an unrelated post here) but... Dragonlordz... do you work for EA, Origin, Bioware?? Have you had some part in the programming in the development of the ME games?? Are you part of the Origin team for distribution of Origin??

[chance52]

Dragoonlordz wrote...


If the customers were actually putting more effort into combatting it then the publishers wouldn't have to do so much.

...

I love Las Vegas and not once has any casino asked me to chase down a card counter or tackle a chip thief.

If you are a good Samaritan will you help out when you see people breaking rules or behaving unlawfully, sure.  But since when does paying for a video game and going home to play it afford me the opportunity to turn in a software pirate?

Also whats wrong with trying invisible watermarks? Wouldn't that method be a lot more successful in the long run?  Actually tracking down the ones responsible for pirating in the first place?  Not full proof but seems a lot better than current methods.

[MingWolf]

Icinix wrote...

MingWolf wrote...
They are trying to stop it, I admire that.  Limited success?  Heh, nah.  If a pirate copy of any DRM'ed game exists out there that provides the same functionality as the original, there is no success.  No limited success.  It has not deterred anything.  In this realm of software theft, it is all-or-nothing.  So far, I haven't seen the all but plenty of nothing.  

*I do not endorse piracy, I hate it, and I will probably get banned for saying this*

Piracy can obviously be expected to be cheaper than doing the right thing, but what piracy should never be is EASIER than doing the right thing.

When you have created a situation where a pirated version of a game is EASIER to play and provides less overheads on the gamer and less restrictions on when, how, where they play the game, you have a big problem.

Aye.  That is the root of it.

[Dragoonlordz]

Mitchumas wrote...

(Mods forgive me for an unrelated post here) but... Dragonlordz... do you work for EA, Origin, Bioware?? Have you had some part in the programming in the development of the ME games?? Are you part of the Origin team for distribution of Origin??

No, no and nope. Followed by nope (other than like you suggest ideas and opinions on what would like in the game). Lastly again nope.

My turn, does this mean my opinion is any less valid than yours?

[billy the squid]

Icinix wrote...

MingWolf wrote...
They are trying to stop it, I admire that.  Limited success?  Heh, nah.  If a pirate copy of any DRM'ed game exists out there that provides the same functionality as the original, there is no success.  No limited success.  It has not deterred anything.  In this realm of software theft, it is all-or-nothing.  So far, I haven't seen the all but plenty of nothing.  

*I do not endorse piracy, I hate it, and I will probably get banned for saying this*

Piracy can obviously be expected to be cheaper than doing the right thing, but what piracy should never be is EASIER than doing the right thing.

When you have created a situation where a pirated version of a game is EASIER to play and provides less overheads on the gamer and less restrictions on when, how, where they play the game, you have a big problem.

I don't see anything wrong with what you've said, it has always been a balancing act between the legal rights of the IP holder and the legal rights of the consumer. Piracy is a subsidiary issue.

Overheads, tends to mean the fiscal cost of doing business, which can't be avoided, but in this context I take it you mean something else? I also happen to agree, there is a limit to how much I'm willing to tolerate in terms of DRM. Create a good game which has an obvious amount of care and time placed in the development, with a lot of content and I'm far more willing to put up with the DRM, to a degree, and sympathetic to the developer in question.

Now, make a poorly ported game, Day 1 DLC, make it appear like the publisher is nickle and diming users with packs and other rubbish, stick in some draconian DRM and poor tech and game patching, and my position becomes far less sympathetic.

[Mitchumas]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Mitchumas wrote...

(Mods forgive me for an unrelated post here) but... Dragonlordz... do you work for EA, Origin, Bioware?? Have you had some part in the programming in the development of the ME games?? Are you part of the Origin team for distribution of Origin??

No, no and nope. Followed by nope (other than like you suggest ideas and opinions on what would like in the game). Lastly again nope.

My turn, does this mean my opinion is any less valid than yours?

No, not at all... i was just asking... I believe everyone has a right to express their opinion... or it wouldn't be much of a debate then would it. You just seem to be very informed is all... that or you spend alot of time on here...

[Furtled]

@Dragoonlordz & Dmex
The majority of people who kicked up a fuss about CDProjekt's legal action did so because 1) Ignoring the privacy issues, IP as proof is still a very iffy area and 2) they were asking for well above the actual cost of the game.

When firms were trying this in the UK even the House of Lords condemned the practice: "In a civil procedure on a technical matter, it [amount being demanded and method of demands] amounts to blackmail; the cost of defending one of these things is reckoned to be £10,000"

Now I love CDP-R's approach to both their product and to their customers (and in no way support those who pirate their games because they don't have any excuse for it), but I couldn't support the way they used the law in this case and have a huge amount of respect for them for backing down.

Any way, heading back out as I see there's unlikely to be any more questions answered prior to launch; I'd urge anyone in the UK to contact the Information Commissioner's Office about this, EA appear not to listen to their customers but most companies tend to pull their socks up when threatened with investigations and large fines. To those who don't have an issue with Origin or the EULA I hope you have a blast playing ME3.

And same here to whoever else mentioned it, after two weeks of back and forth with EA Support over this I got an email offering me a 15% discount on Origin purchases too.

Modifié par Furtled, 27 janvier 2012 - 11:28 .

[Abirn]

ZLurps wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

How far do you think the oft-exampled appliance companies would get, if they tried to claim the "right" to require you prove that you had actually purchased a toaster before the coils would heat up, every single morning as you made toast?  Or that they could show up and confiscate any toaster you didn't have a receipt for at any time? 

In the real world, there needs to be reasonable suspicion or other solidly actionable grounds before someone can be accused of theft and have the items taken away from them, and the burden of proof is on the accuser. 

Only in the fantasy world of software company HQs do they think it's reasonable to force people to prove that they didn't steal something over and over again. 

I think one reason for online activations and DRM is because corporate nature of say EA or Activision. Investors read horror stories about piracy and DRM is answer that companies gives to stockholders over and over again. Investors buy it because they don't know about gaming world and how things really work and they don't care. Nature of the beast.

I think it's going to backfire at some point.

Is Valve not a corporation?  Aren't they regarded as doing it the Right way.  EA tried to copy Valve's successful tactics, which they should, it's successful for a reason. Then they screwed it up every way they could.   Gabe has come out and said Piracy is a service issue.  Do you know why Itunes is so successful.  Services like Steam and Itunes has actually helped to stem the tide of Piracy.  (you will never eliminate it and that is a fact of life, some people are morally bankrupt and will do it because its cheap no matter how difficult you make it)  Last time I checked the folks over at valve are swimming in Money. 

[ZLurps]

Abirn wrote...

ZLurps wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

How far do you think the oft-exampled appliance companies would get, if they tried to claim the "right" to require you prove that you had actually purchased a toaster before the coils would heat up, every single morning as you made toast?  Or that they could show up and confiscate any toaster you didn't have a receipt for at any time? 

In the real world, there needs to be reasonable suspicion or other solidly actionable grounds before someone can be accused of theft and have the items taken away from them, and the burden of proof is on the accuser. 

Only in the fantasy world of software company HQs do they think it's reasonable to force people to prove that they didn't steal something over and over again. 

I think one reason for online activations and DRM is because corporate nature of say EA or Activision. Investors read horror stories about piracy and DRM is answer that companies gives to stockholders over and over again. Investors buy it because they don't know about gaming world and how things really work and they don't care. Nature of the beast.

I think it's going to backfire at some point.

Is Valve not a corporation?  Aren't they regarded as doing it the Right way.  EA tried to copy Valve's successful tactics, which they should, it's successful for a reason. Then they screwed it up every way they could.   Gabe has come out and said Piracy is a service issue.  Do you know why Itunes is so successful.  Services like Steam and Itunes has actually helped to stem the tide of Piracy.  (you will never eliminate it and that is a fact of life, some people are morally bankrupt and will do it because its cheap no matter how difficult you make it)  Last time I checked the folks over at valve are swimming in Money. 

That's exactly it. Valve isn't a corporation.

[Abirn]

That's exactly it. Valve isn't a corporation.

I'm pretty sure they are,  Gabe would have to be stupid not to have the personal protection of limited Liability afforded to companies by the law.  

[eyesofastorm]

http://www.valvesoftware.com/

Look at the fine print at the bottom of the page.

edit:  It just goes to show that corporations don't *have* to be evil.

Modifié par eyesofastorm, 27 janvier 2012 - 11:32 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Mitchumas wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Mitchumas wrote...

(Mods forgive me for an unrelated post here) but... Dragonlordz... do you work for EA, Origin, Bioware?? Have you had some part in the programming in the development of the ME games?? Are you part of the Origin team for distribution of Origin??

No, no and nope. Followed by nope (other than like you suggest ideas and opinions on what would like in the game). Lastly again nope.

My turn, does this mean my opinion is any less valid than yours?

No, not at all... i was just asking... I believe everyone has a right to express their opinion... or it wouldn't be much of a debate then would it. You just seem to be very informed is all... that or you spend alot of time on here...

You have my apologies then, yes I have been here quite a long time now. After being on here for a long period of time tends to make someone slightly more defensive (on the lookout as it were) than ideally would like due to the nature of a huge amount of BSN users using questions to prelude an attack on persona or ideals.

Hence why my question may have come across as semi-confrontational because I thought your question was such a prelude but I misjudged you. Sorry.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 janvier 2012 - 11:37 .

[Forbidden]

dmex wrote...

Imagine a scenario where there were 50,000 pirates to every one customer, all accessing support, our servers, our content...etc without buying the game to pay for these services... Realtime Worlds (makers of APB Reloaded) is a good example of what happens, servers get overloaded causing players to lag and dropout, product support gets delayed... ruining the gaming experience for paying customers and costing the company millions because people didn't want to pay $20 for a great game they loved.

The free2play MMOs that are so in vogue right now disprove this thesis.

Activation is a fact of life for almost all software these days, you can thank every last pirate for making this happen and making it worse. Dragoonlordz explained very well it's much better having something simple than mailing a receipt every time you want to download something or ask support about a problem and this is what Origin does, makes it simple while also not 'phoning home' or installing DRM.

   Every DRM'd game gets pirated anyway.  Making the games more difficult for paying customers does not prevent piracy.

[OperativeX]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Mitchumas wrote...

(Mods forgive me for an unrelated post here) but... Dragonlordz... do you work for EA, Origin, Bioware?? Have you had some part in the programming in the development of the ME games?? Are you part of the Origin team for distribution of Origin??

No, no and nope. Followed by nope (other than like you suggest ideas and opinions on what would like in the game). Lastly again nope.

My turn, does this mean my opinion is any less valid than yours?

Origin/DRM hurts buying customers. The criminals are getting the same games we buy without all the hurdles. Your opinion is a mute point.

The fact in the matter is that there are better DRM's out there but EA refuses to use them or simply lacks the skill to contruct one that doesn't hurt only the customers.

I've said it before and i'll say it again - Croteam put a DRM in Serious Sam 3 BFE which only activates when the game code is cracked. It causes a giant unkillable scorpion to appear in the game which murders your character over and over until the game is ruined for u because u can't progress. This was true skill from the devs. The people who paid for the game did not suffer the scorpion.

There are no install limits for Serious Sam 3. Only pirates got a kick in the balls. Legit paying customers got a fun game. The way it should be.

Origin/DRM is a complete and utter waste of time. It needs radical change

[billy the squid]

dp

Modifié par billy the squid, 27 janvier 2012 - 11:41 .

[BGSMERP]

@Dragoonlordz

You can't write a 100% solution to online-piracy. That will never happen. Every DRM and copyright-protection is written by a programmer. It's naive to think there's no ****** who can't compete with the programmers of the DRM. Every DRM that was worth it was eventually cracked. And if you have such a game like ME3 I can assure you, the illegal pirate version will come very soon. There's even a chance it will come out BEFORE the official release. No publisher or developer is going to stop that regardless how much he tries.
And that's a matter of fact that can be proven by history.

Now, a game without any DRM won't be a solution either. One does not need much criminal intent to download a pirate copy, unlike thievery for example. A DRM which is a high enough obstacle for the averagy user will usually be enough. And registration at the installation is such a method.

You can compare a video-game to a book. What you buy is a basically copy of what someone did. And now just imagine a book with a restrict DRM. After you bought it you at first have to register the book, create an account for it, and you need a special device (the book-equivalent to a client like Origin). Every time you open your book it connects with the servers to authorize you. Every single time. If you don't have a connection for any reason (and one shouldn't assume that's a matter of course) the book simply won't open. If the author is doing some maintenance work on his servers, you can't open your book. If the author decides after 5 years, that no one will read his book anyway, he shuts down the servers and you can't open the book anymore at all. For the rest of your life.

But of course, I forgot. EA and other companies are trying to tell me I just bought a license to play there game. Not an actual product, just the permission to use. And that can expire when the company decides it.
That might sound familiar to me, as I also have bought the license for software like Photoshop and 3ds max.
But! Do I have to authenticate myself every time I start Photoshop? NO. Do I have to run a client I didn't want that gives me no benefit at all? NO. When does my license expire? Never, it's permanently. And aside from authenticate my serial when installing theres nothing more I have to do. Even registering the software is optional.
Bear in mind I have paid over 1000 € for each product. And each has a less severe DRM system than a video-game nowadays.

The very strict copyright systems, be it Steam, EA Origin, Ubi-Launcher or SecuRom are in no relation to the price of the PRODUCT. There are merely an ordeal for every paying customer.

With DRM companies like EA are trying to fathom what the paying consumer is willing to accept. And every time they do something too drastic, they take a step back just to try even more devious methods. The motive is clear: Maximum profit.
In my opinion EA (and Ubisoft and quite a lot of other companies) have proven their criminal intent way to often.
They earn nothing but my severe distrust.
I wouldn't have believed Hitler either, if he had said the holocaust would not happen again. Someone doing something criminal and hideous will most likely do it again. Therefore I have no reason to believe EA will change. They have treated the paying costumer as a criminal in the past, they do it now and they will do it in the future.
And I regret that I have supported them with my money.

That's a mistake I won't repeat. It's just a pity for a company like Bioware that they're now under the iron grip of the 'Empire of Evil' by the name EA.

[Forbidden]

AlanC9 wrote...

Forbidden wrote...

You encrypt chunks of the game with an encryption scheme that isn't mickey mouse, then e-mail a keyfile with the electronic reciept.  The electronic reciept becomes an electronic signature that ties back to the name and credit card of the person who bought it in the vendor's database.  The client's computer never connects to the internet, never contacts back to the publisher.  However, any copy of the game that appears on pirate sites can be tracked back to the purchser.  You then sue them into oblivion.  Do this a few times and people will be more careful with their copies.  Lawful paying customers are not hindered by nonsense. 

Interesting scheme. It does rather limit the ways you can let people pay for the game, though. No cash, no prepaid cards, nothing that can't be traced back to an individual user.

True, but this is specifically designed for online purchases, so cash is out anyway.  I'm not familiar enough with prepaid cards, but gift card type things would also be out, too.  But most online purchases are going to be credit or debit cards, which both work fine with this.

[ZLurps]

Abirn wrote...

That's exactly it. Valve isn't a corporation.

I'm pretty sure they are,  Gabe would have to be stupid not to have the personal protection of limited Liability afforded to companies by the law.  

Uups, sorry about that. I meant that they aren't in stock exhange. That gives them a lot of freedom compared to corporations that are in stock exhange. They don't need to worry about saying something and can take risks without need to worry about their stock losing value in exhange.
Sorry, I'm not very good to explain these things in English.

[Icinix]

billy the squid wrote...

Icinix wrote...

MingWolf wrote...
They are trying to stop it, I admire that.  Limited success?  Heh, nah.  If a pirate copy of any DRM'ed game exists out there that provides the same functionality as the original, there is no success.  No limited success.  It has not deterred anything.  In this realm of software theft, it is all-or-nothing.  So far, I haven't seen the all but plenty of nothing.  

*I do not endorse piracy, I hate it, and I will probably get banned for saying this*

Piracy can obviously be expected to be cheaper than doing the right thing, but what piracy should never be is EASIER than doing the right thing.

When you have created a situation where a pirated version of a game is EASIER to play and provides less overheads on the gamer and less restrictions on when, how, where they play the game, you have a big problem.

I don't see anything wrong with what you've said, it has always been a balancing act between the legal rights of the IP holder and the legal rights of the consumer. Piracy is a subsidiary issue.

Overheads, tends to mean the fiscal cost of doing business, which can't be avoided, but in this context I take it you mean something else? I also happen to agree, there is a limit to how much I'm willing to tolerate in terms of DRM. Create a good game which has an obvious amount of care and time placed in the development, with a lot of content and I'm far more willing to put up with the DRM, to a degree, and sympathetic to the developer in question.

Now, make a poorly ported game, Day 1 DLC, make it appear like the publisher is nickle and diming users with packs and other rubbish, stick in some draconian DRM and poor tech and game patching, and my position becomes far less sympathetic.

Yeah - I meant overheads in a system resource, time to game etc meaning. Was probably a bit broad with using the term.

...and exactly right. That limit people can tolerate when it comes to DRM practicies is probably very close to being reached (Ubisoft have already crossed the line - pretty much every game they make). The more DRM measures you install, the greater number of people who will start to look for alternatives.

In the words of Princess Leia - the more you tighten your grip, the more gamers will slip through your fingers.

[MingWolf]

BGSMERP wrote...

-snip to save space-

Good post.

[Dragoonlordz]

Forbidden wrote...

dmex wrote...

Imagine a scenario where there were 50,000 pirates to every one customer, all accessing support, our servers, our content...etc without buying the game to pay for these services... Realtime Worlds (makers of APB Reloaded) is a good example of what happens, servers get overloaded causing players to lag and dropout, product support gets delayed... ruining the gaming experience for paying customers and costing the company millions because people didn't want to pay $20 for a great game they loved.

The free2play MMOs that are so in vogue right now disprove this thesis.

Guessing you haven't played many F2P MMO's then. As someone who has played over a hundred or more F2P MMO's and dozens of paid for ones. F2P is laggy to the extreme in most cases. After the initial interest upon release the numbers drop insanely fast and most people end up either using it as nothing more than a chat program with flashy avatars or only log in to vlaim the freebies then 20-30 minutes later log back out. They almost all run on micro transactions and they just about keep their heads above water.

The companies that produce them have to produce so many variations of the titles because they then are bringing in lots of small amounts of profit vs just one small amount of profit. In most cases the titles be it 5 or 10 F2P MMO's are run by the same publisher and the support staff is mostly covered across all by a few people. They put in a few GM's but even they work across multiple titles to save cost and maximize profit due to the small amount of revnue they each make.

All of this however is redundant because the example given by Dmex is factually true in that there was a huge backlash by paying customers over the situation he mentioned which in past a title had more people using the servers who stole the game than bought. Do not also forget MMO's have 'always on' style of DRM (including F2P ones) if want to play them. If they added such thing to ME3 then you would moan about it far more. Illegal servers do not impact paying customers (they have some effect on developer though regarding loss of customers) but that is not the example Dmex gave.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 janvier 2012 - 11:49 .